Regular marked price: $19.98Discount Price: $17.99
Cost Savings: $1.99 (10%)Price fluctuation possible.
How soon does it ship: Normal ship time within one day
Shipping? Absolutely FREE if you qualify for Super Saver Shipping.
Aspect Ratio: 2.55:1
Audience Rated by buyers NR (Not Rated)
Type of bind: DVD
Brand: Warner Brothers
EAN num: 9780790747491
Format: Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, DVD-Video, Subtitled, Widescreen, NTSC
ISBN number: 0790747499
Label: Warner Home Video
Manufacturer: Warner Home Video
Quantity: 1
Publishing house: Warner Home Video
Region Code: 1
Release Date: July 01, 2003
Running Time: 115 minutes
Sale Popularity Level: 24528
Studio: Warner Home Video
Theatrical Release Date: January 15, 1954
Other books you might be interested in perusing:
Editor's Notes and Comments:
Description:
Historical drama exposing the famous love triangle in King Arthur's Court.
Amazon.com:
This 1953 follow-up to the successful teaming of actor Robert Taylour and director Richard Thorpe on Ivanhoe isn't quite as good a film, but it is a sumptuous adventure-romance shot on location in England. MGM's very first widescreen production finds Taylour playing Sir Lancelot to Mel Ferrer's King Arthur. Based in part on Thomas Malory's 14th-century version of the Camelot legend, Knights of the Round Table tells the familiar tale of Arthur's construction of a Utopian kingdom, where virtue, courage, and a sense of possibility rule the hearts of strong men. Lancelot is there every step of the way, but after Arthur marries a particularly bodacious Guinevere (Ava Gardner), Lancelot can't stifle his love for her, nor can she stifle her own for him. That chink in the wall of the Camelot dream is exploited by detractors Morgan le Fay (Anne Crawford) and Mordred (Stanley Baker), who set up the lovers for their downfall. The script by Talbot Jennings is proficient at capturing the outsized passions of Malory's epic, which may be one reason why Ivanhoe, with a bit more understatedness, is the better of the two adaptations. True-blue Arthurians, however, will want to see this for its visual sweep and loyalty to the source. --Tom Keogh
User popularity level:
Rated by buyers 
-
I saw this film as a child & bought it for my grandchildren they loved it too. I want them to learn that entertaining movies can be made without unnecessary violence, gore & filth.
Rated by buyers 
-
**1/2 1953. Directed by Richard Thorpe. Two nominations for the Academy awards (Decoration and Sound). Arthur is designed as King of England but Modred and his wife Morgan Le Fay conspire in order to prove that Queen Guinevere is cheating on Arthur with Lancelot. Apart of the battle scenes, the movie is very static as if the sets were too small for the actors or the camera to move. In short, great colors but that's about all. Already forgotten.
Rated by buyers -
As a youngster, when my mother took me to see this, I was in awe!, for months I was a "little boy knight", now many years later, well, I still "like" the movie, but the glitter is gone, costumes are splendid, the battles are awesome still, the acting, well it is pretty dull, only the late Stanley Baker as Modred and Felix Aylmer as Merlin are alive enough to carry some of it, as usual, Robert Taylour can only act in a limited way, but he does try hard. My grandson is just two and a half years, far too young to understand anything in the film, I can hardly wait for him to become a "little boy knight" also and relive a small portion of my childhood. OH, the screen play wipes out many things in the book, view it with a grain of salt.
Rated by buyers -
As a kid I liked the movie. Still a pretty good one. Only difference is that I give it a 3 when as a kid I would have given it a 5. Still worth watching though. But as I had read more on the legend of King Arthur and watched recent movies portraying other angles to the story, this movie leaves out a lot of important details and adds new twists that disappoint this version. This is more of the fairy tale version of Arthur. If I had to rank the King Arthur movies, I would put Excalibur very first followed by King Arthur, The Last Legion and then Knights of the Round Table.
Rated by buyers 
-
This is possibly the worst collision of big budget and lack of direction I have ever seen. The actors stand around like statues in scenes delivering unemotional lines like statues. It's like a shoddy high school play. The swordfighting appeared like they had never even practiced before the shot, looking pathetic and inept. This film is strictly amateur hour. There are teenage-made short films on youtube that are more professional looking then this dreck. After watching 15 minutes I gave up. I paid a grand total of $3 for a used VHS tape of this...and I feel I got took! A vastly superior film of the same subject is "Excalibur", directed by John Boorman from 1981.
Find other books like this one:
